Working Group - KCSIE 2026 changes - improve the guidance via the consultation process, promote more responses & more

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

Hello everyone - I was hoping to start a working group of some sort in order to respond to the proposed changes to KCSIE (Keeping Children Safe In Education)

Press release https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-to-publish-new-gender-guidance-for-schools

Proposed changes and response mechanism https://consult.education.gov.uk/independent-education-and-school-safeguarding-division/keeping-children-safe-in-education-2026-revisions/

I have a large personal interest in this. If you are not aware, I am the father in this article in The Times https://archive.ph/C4eXs

Can we come together to build a strategy of supporting the parts the changes which are great, for example the very clear statements of toilets and changing rooms being single sex?

And think how to propose possible changes to the statements about sport and especially about allowing social transitioning at school?

I'd very much love to hear your ideas and suggestions. I don't want to lead the group especially or tell anyone what to do - I am certain there are people with more knowledge than me, but I thought I could start off the conversation?

But To be honest I don’t think schools should allow changes of pronouns at all.

This is where the protected characteristic of gender reassignment applying to children causes real problems.

I’d strongly argue that the protected characteristic of gender reassignment does not and was never intended to apply to someone just saying they might be trans. It was meant to, and absolutely should apply to people actually undergoing surgery. However It still cannot, ever compel someone’s speech whatever the other person has or has not done to themselves.

Children should never even be asked to use the wrong pronouns for someone. Teachers should not lie to children.

We are always told that it does - but how has this been established? What age does it kick in? A 1 year old, 5 or 8?
How does society's responsibility to safeguard children balance again someone insisting that their 2 year old is really the opposite sex?

I suspect this is another fake Stonewall law promoted by the men desperate to transition young children that everyone passively accepts. Having said that, I appreciate it would need testing in a court of law.

Just as we had to have the Supreme Court to confirm that of course sex means biological sex, we need to have it confirmed that of course the PC of gender reassignment can't possibly apply to babies, toddlers, little children etc and nobody intended that when this was written into the statute.

(sorry for the rant - it just enrages me that we're expected to accept this frankly predatory demand about children).

The EHRC has always been clear that the protected characteristic of gender reassignment applies to children.

Here's their technical guidance to schools

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/2024/Technical%20guidance%20for%20schools%20England%20updated%20September%202023%20-%20amended%20July%202024.docx

Thank you.
I still don't believe that this has been legally tested alongside the rights if children to be safeguarded. We know that the EHRC has published incorrect guidance in the past influenced by activists.

It just seems so evidently hazardous to children. Sorry - I don't mean to derail the thread so will stop now. It's such an age inappropriate, dangerous thing to state about children that I find it hard to believe we must accept it.

Apologies if I’ve missed the point but hasn’t it been established by the SC (and later followed by the Darlington judgment) that the PC of GR protects the holder from discrimination but does not confer additional privileges? So in this case a gender questioning child would be entitled to the same education as a non gender questioning child of the same sex. It doesn’t confer additional “rights” e.g. access to opposite sex facilities or compelled speech from others regarding pronouns.

Therefore it seems a moot point whether or not children have the PC of gender reassignment or not - as all children are entitled to an education provided by the state. (And none entitled to compel speech or access opposite sex facilities)

I may well have got this horribly wrong in which case please someone correct me.

It doesn’t confer additional “rights” e.g. access to opposite sex facilities or compelled speech from others regarding pronouns.

I think this is unclear, re pronouns, particularly when it comes to teachers.

The EHRC guidance on gender reassignment gives this example of 'harassment'.

But the technical guidance to schools says "Unwanted conduct by a school towards a pupil that is related to the protected characteristics of gender reassignment, religion or belief, or sexual orientation and which results in a pupil suffering a detriment is not covered by the harassment provisions. However, it is unlawful under the direct discrimination provisions of the Act if the pupil suffers a disadvantage." so I don't know whether that harassment example would apply to schools (and if not, why not).

Good info thank you.

In this case "gender reassignment" overmuch needs a definition then? It can;t just be "I said so 2m ago" surely

And regardless, compelled speech still cannot be permitted?

But then this country is backwards in so many ways.

Agree that it's an obvious safeguarding failure to pretend children can change sex. We'll look back on this in horror in years to come. It's an obvious failure of existing statements in KCSIE e.g. emotional abuse including expecting children to understand concepts not compatible with their development and understanding - given most adults can't define gender this seems self-evidently true of all children in schools.

If asked I'd bet good money any children asked would equate feeling like the opposite 'gender' (i.e. sex) to what toys a child plays with and what clothes they like to wear. This seems a poor reason to set a child on a pathway which will result (in adulthood at least now I hope) in medical interventions on a healthy body and will result in confusing and harmful psychological interventions during a key period of psychological development (i.e. childhood).

The problem is that gender ideology relies on coercive control, and whilst that works well and is in fact the point for adult males because they want power and to use women and girls (not mutually respectful relationships) what will happen with children is that the other children will try and avoid anyone trying to compel their speech or position themselves as more important than the others. The adults in school may well go along with it (through fear or stupidity) but although they might be able to compel pretence, lying and speech of all the other children in school (which is clear emotional abuse of them - as defined in KCSIE) you cannot force children to be friends. And parents certainly will safeguard their children against this abuse and have their children's backs to resist this attempt at coercive control of them and many parents will also be unwilling to participate in clear emotional abuse of other children too.

Edited to add: somehow added in the wrong quote here. Sorry

It's not harassment to tell the truth about biological reality. Saying it is = attempt at coercive control.

Agreed. Back in the day, the out of control transactivists in the Crown Prosecution Service wrote some abysmal guidelines for schools in which they attempted to police children's friendships by insisting that any gender confused child who was not immediately accepted into a conversation / friendship group had been subjected to transphobia.
It was a stark example of how coercive control of others is embedded in the thinking and actions of these adults. They were completely oblivious in their desperation to impose their demands on children. Once the CPS were threatened with a judicial review the guidelines were hastily withdrawn rather than face judicial and public scrutiny.

Just did a week of editing statements again. Very much looking forward to sharing that when I am allowed to.The things I know about that school now.....

OK On this thread - I think it's really important to respond to the consultation, I am really really worried about the pronouns and the removal of definitions more than anything else.

Going to trawl through responses here so far and try o collect them together into all the major points?

Please would someone remind me:
is information in books intended for children, which might easily be in school libraries or the children’s section of libraries, currently allowed to state that, regardless of their sexed body, they might have been born in the wrong body for their ‘gender’?

I thought this was not allowed, but perhaps that was only true in the Conservatives’ planned guidelines that never got implemented after the last election.

The protected characteristic is based on the GRC and no child can get a GRC, so schools can't use that to justify social transitioning.
Another point worth making is that Cass advised against social transitioning.

This is incorrect. All that is required to acquire the protected characteristic of gender reassignment is to propose undergoing a process of transition and thus applies to children too. GRCs are irrelevant.

That interpretation has not at all been tested. Don't rely on it.

That’s the EHRC’s interpretation of it and it is in the documents aimed at schools,

It’s what we have to work with.

Got a link for that? (So I can try to incorporate)

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/2024/Technical%20guidance%20for%20schools%20England%20updated%20September%202023%20-%20amended%20July%202024.docx

Which says “The Equality and Human Rights Commission (‘the Commission’) has prepared and issued this Technical Guidance on the basis of its powers to provide information and advice under s13 of the Equality Act 2006 (EA 2006).
This Guidance is not a statutory code issued under EA 2006, s14, but it may be used as evidence in legal proceedings. If education providers follow this Guidance, it may help them to avoid the court making an adverse decision in such proceedings.”

It was updated relatively recently to clarify that children can have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. That’s the legal advice.

Having the pc of gender reassignment does not equal a right to use opposite sex spaces (destroying safeguarding for all other children) nor a right to force or coerce other children to use wrong-sex pronouns (aka emotional abuse as defined in KCSIE).

All it means is that they cannot be treated worse than a pupil without the pc of GR (with the same sex). And given other children aren't demanding teachers call them 'your highness' or coerce all the other children to call them 'your highness' or whatever else they fancy based on their inner feelings, then I really fail to see how this affects a schools actions at all. As long as teachers offer them the same support services as any other vulnerable pupil then there is no chance of any successful litigation.

The same cannot be said about forcing girls to submit to voyeurism, indecent exposure and sexual harrassment by forcing them to share with boys (XY) in private spaces. (edited to add as hopefully OP will very shortly be proving).

All it means is that they cannot be treated worse than a pupil without the pc of GR

It potentially means that the school can’t refuse a parental request for John to be called Susan though, as other pupils will be allowed a preferred name on the register.

I think the jury may be out on preferred pronouns. Usually the advice to those uncomfortable (I’m talking teachers as employees rather than other students) is to avoid pronouns and use names, using wrong pronouns deliberately would be an issue.

I really hope at some point all the parents of all the girls in a school forcing them to undress in front of a boy will take a class action lawsuit. Or indeed the other way around (even though the safety issues aren't there in that direction, the dignity ones are). Because it's not just about 'balancing rights' of two people with different protection characteristics it's about completely abandoning safeguarding and forcing the vast majority of children to suffer harm because of 1 or 2 students, who could easily use a separate toilet and changing area, if needed.

It's about imposing adult wants on children to their detriment and harm. It's utterly shocking beyond belief it's been allowed to happen.

No-one cares what kids are called. That's a total non issue. Anyone can change their name.

Avoiding pronouns is a way to avoid a pain in the arse parent. But if parents are insisting on it I'd consider that a safeguarding red flag. Why are they so wedded to the idea everyone must pretend their child is something other than what they materially are? It's all a bit Munchausens by proxy. If it was about literally anything else than biological sex, there would be safeguarding flags raised.

Edited to add: it's now not legal to give puberty blockers or cross sex hormones to a child so they WILL go through puberty and their biological sex WILL be obvious. Pretending to the child they can opt out of their sex is at best deep unkindness and at worst abuse.

The draft guidelines - while not perfect - do make some progress - especially as they're embedded KCSIE. They are completely clear that
"schools must not allow pupils into toilets, changing rooms, or boarding or residential accommodation designated for the opposite sex, with no exceptions".
This in itself will bring to an end the pretence that children can "change sex" and is a clear legal boundary. It will also stop the adults with the predatory belief that girls must undress in front of boys, in their tracks.

I also sorry I have not been on this and driving things forward, this - https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5507367-mixed-sex-changing-rooms-in-a-brighton-secondary-school-part-3-were-really-cooking-now?reply=151261283 has taken up all my time. I promise now this is moving forward to try to get things together - also everyones suggestions are hugely valuable please keep them coming and push things onward!